The most important of these is the arrangement of the incidents,i.e., plot, as defined above. for tragedy is not a representation of men but of a piece of action, of life, of happiness and unhappiness, which come under the head of action, and the end aimed at is the representation not of qualities of character but of some action; and while character makes men what they are,it’s their actions and experiences that make them happy or the opposite.

They do not therefore act to represent character, but character-study is included for the sake of the action. It follows that the incidents and the plot are the end at which tragedy aims, and in everything the end aimed at is of prime importance.

Moreover, you could not have a tragedy without action, but you can have one with out character-study.

Indeed the tragedies of most modern poets are without this, and, speaking generally, there are many such writers, whose case is like that of Zeuxis compared with Polygnotus.Zeuxis’s portraits were ideal (cf. Aristot. Poet. 25.28). The latter was good at depicting character, but there is nothing of this in Zeuxis’s painting.

A further argument is that if a man writes a series of speeches full of character and excellent in point of diction and thought, he will not achieve the proper function of tragedy nearly so well as a tragedy which, while inferior in these qualities, has a plot or arrangement of incidents.